Prop. 27C - Lk 20:27-38 - Structural Diagram

The Resurrection and Marriage- Luke 20:27-38

Passage Structure
v27-33 Sadducees try to stump Jesus, with a silly question
v34-36 Jesus shows Sadducees their lack of knowledge
v37-38 Jesus proves to Sadducees that the resurrection is taught in the Torah.

27 Some of the Sadducees,
…..…..who say there is no resurrection,
…..came to Jesus with a question.
28 "Teacher,"
…..…..they said,
….."Moses wrote for us
…..…..that if a man's brother dies
…..…..…..and leaves a wife
…..…..…..but no children,
…..…..…..…..the man must marry the widow
…..…..…..…..and have children
…..…..…..…..…..for his brother.
29 Now there were seven brothers.
…..The first one
…..…..married a woman
…..…..…..and died childless.
30-31 The second
…..…..and then the third
…..…..married her,
…..…..and in the same way
…..…..…..the seven died,
…..…..…..…..leaving no children.
32 Finally,
…..the woman died too.
33 Now then,
…..at the resurrection
…..…..whose wife will she be,
…..…..…..since the seven
…..…..…..…..were married to her?"
34Jesus replied,
….."The people of this age
…..…..marry
…..…..and are given in marriage.
35 But those
…..who are considered worthy
…..…..of taking part in that age
…..…..and in the resurrection
…..…..…..…..from the dead
…..…..…..will neither marry
…..…..…..nor be given in marriage,
36 and they can no longer die;
…..for they are like the angels.
…..They are God's children,
…..…..since they are children
…..…..…..of the resurrection.
37 But in the account of the bush,
…..even Moses
…..…..showed that the dead rise,
…..…..…..for he calls the Lord
…..…..…..…..'the God of Abraham,
…..…..…..…..and the God of Isaac,
…..…..…..…..and the God of Jacob.'
38 He is not
…..the God of the dead,
…..…..but of the living,
…..….…...for to him
…..…..…..…..all are alive."

Repeating words or ideas
resurrection - v27, 33, 35, 36
age - v34, 35
marry - v28, 29, 30, 31

Explanations/Reasons
v36 since - God's children/children of the resurrection
v37 for - the dead rise/Moses calls the Lord "God of Ab. Isac. Jac."

Contrasts
v38 but - not God of dead/God of Living

Comparison
v36 like - "those worthy of taking part in that age" like angels

Names/Titles of God

Lists
v28 Lists of conditions under which a man must take his brother's wife for his own.
a. death of brother
b. leaves a wife
c. there is no children

v37 List of OT Patriarchs in conjunction with a title of God
a. God of Abraham
b. God of Isaac
c. God of Jacob.

the king of the Hill

Introduction
1. Structural Diagram
2. Surrounding Context
3. Key Cross References
4. Key Questions
5. Thoughts and Meditation

Prop. 27C - Lk 20:27-38 - Surrounding Context

Context:
This passage does not have s strong linguistic link with the passages surrounding it. Instead it connects with it's repetition of a theme. In the preceding passages (and a few verses after it), Jesus is butting heads with the 'establishment'. First he drives out the profiteers from the temple, then is approached a number of times by the 'establishment' in attempts to trap him in his words, Jesus tells a damning parable, and outright denounces the scribes publicly. Jesus was out to pick a fight from the moment he arrived. Like the owners son returning to the vineyard, he wanted his due, and like the tenants in that parable, they were not about to give Him any. They set out to trap him, and kill him off.

The other strong theme that is present, is the issue of authority. Jesus is questioned about it, and Jesus displays it: in His actions, and in his words - words that dumbfounded it's listeners.

After the end of chapter 20, there appears to be a change in subject matter. In my opinion the logical end of this thematic section is at the very end of chapter 21. I am hard pressed to find a contextual link beyond here.

Preceding Passage Notes - Chapter 19:45-20:26
Jesus gets mad... - Luke 19:45-48
Summary - Jesus confronts the corruption of the temple market. Quotes Isa 56:7, Jer 7:11. Jesus then begins to teach in the temple. "Chief priests, scribes, and leaders of the people" begin to look to kill Jesus.

Similar Themes - Confrontation between Jesus and establishment - Jesus clears the temple/Sadducees test Jesus, Jesus astounds them.
Authority - Jesus authority is displayed in action, by coming to temple and clearing His house/ Jesus displays His authority with Knowledge (about the age to come)

On what authority? - Luke 20:1-8
Summary - The "Chief priests, scribes, and elders" ask Jesus for an account of the authority he is under. Jesus asks the back where John the baptists authority came from, heaven or man? They cannot answer, Jesus refuses to answer also.

Similar Themes - Confrontation between Jesus and establishment - Jesus is asked to name His authority, Jesus asks the 'establishment' a question back/Sadducees test Jesus, Jesus astounds them.
Authority - Jesus authority is questioned he dumbfounds them with His answer/ Jesus displays His authority with Knowledge (about the age to come)

Jesus Passes judgment on the Scribes and Chief Priests - Luke 20:9-19
Summary - Parable tells of vineyard, owner goes away, putting tenants in charge, The tenants throw out the messengers the owner sends to the vineyard for reports. Owner sends his Son who the tenants kill. Question is put: what will the owner do? Kill the tenants, and give vineyard to others. Scribes and chief priests realized Jesus meant them. They want to kill Jesus.

Similar Themes - Confrontation between Jesus and establishment - Jesus tells a damning parable against the 'establishment'/Sadducees test Jesus, Jesus astounds them.
Authority - The authority of the Vineyard owner is described/ Jesus displays His authority with Knowledge (about the age to come)

Jesus Dodges a Trap - Luke 20:20-26
Common Words -
v21 Teacher the title given by the Sadducees, is found here

Summary - "Scribes and chief priests " send spies who attempt to trap Jesus. They ask Jesus to tell them whether they should pay taxes. Jesus replies by asking for a coin, and asking them whose face appears on the coin. The emperor's. Then Jesus tells them to pay to the emperor what is his, and to God the thing's that are God's. Leaves them stunned.

Similar Themes - Confrontation between Jesus and establishment - A trap is set for Jesus in the hope that he can be caught out, Jesus traps the Sadducees with ownership of a Roman coin (follow link for a good discussion of this passage), with the head of Caesar/Sadducees test Jesus, Jesus astounds them.
Authority - Jesus speaks authoritatively/ Jesus displays His authority with Knowledge (about the age to come)

Following Passage Notes - Chapter 20:39-21:38
The Punch line of our text this week! - Luke 20:39-40
Common Words - v39 Teacher the title given by the Sadducees, is found here

Summary - These two verses sum up the reaction to Jesus teaching. They are completely shut down. They give him credit for the precision of his words with a "Well said!" Almost like a "hear, hear" that is heard in parliarment... (In Australia at least, I don't know if they do that sort of thing here in Congress). They then stop asking Him questions.

Son? - Luke 20:41-44
Common Words - v41, 44 "children" appears here in the form 'son' as in David's son
v42, 44 "Lord" appears in these verses

Summary - Jesus poses a question based on David's statement, "The Lord said to my Lord". How can the Messiah be David's Son?

Similar Themes - Confrontation between Jesus and establishment - Jesus throws a question back at the questioners/Sadducees test Jesus, Jesus astounds them.
Authority - Jesus speaks authoritatively, and leaves them with a question they cannot answer/ Jesus displays His authority with Knowledge (about the age to come)

Denouncement of the Scribes - Luke 20:45-47
Summary - Jesus publicly denounces the scribes, as proud and that they will receive the 'greater condemnation'

Similar Themes - Confrontation between Jesus and establishment - Denouncement/Sadducees test Jesus, Jesus astounds them.

The biggest giver - Luke 21:1-4
Summary -Jesus compares the giving of a poor widow, to that of the rich at the temple. She gave out of what she needed, rather than the excess that the rich gave from.

Similar Themes - NONE?

When is this All going to End? - Luke 21:5-38
Common Words - v7 Teacher the title given by the Sadducees, is found here
v36 'those who are considered worthy ' appears in this passage, in an admonishment to be ready for the Lord's coming
v27, 36 "children" appears here in the form 'son' as in 'Son of man'

Summary - Jesus is questioned when the end of the temple. Jesus answers with an extended prophetic description of the horrors to come, and the fate that befalls the Jewish nation. Contains the hotly argued words of Jesus, "This generation will not pass away, until all these things have happened". Ends with a note that Jesus taught at the temple, and all the people came to hear him.

Similar Themes - NONE?

the king of the Hill

Introduction
1. Structural Diagram
2. Surrounding Context
3. Key Cross References
4. Key Questions
5. Thoughts and Meditation

Prop. 27C - Lk 20:27-38 - Key Cross References

Parallel Passages:
Matt 22:23-33, Mk 12:18-27

Citations:
v28 'man's brother dies, leaving a wife but no children'
Deut 25:5-6, Gen 38:8

v37 Moses and Burning Bush
Exod 3:2

Idea Cross References:
v27 'no resurrection' - Acts 23:8, 1 Cor 15:12

v35 'age' - Matt 12:32, Mk 10:30, Lk 20:34-35, Eph 1:21, Heb 6:5

v36 'God's children' - Jn 1:12, Deut 14:1, Rom 8:14-21, Eph 5:1, 1 John 3:23

v37 'God of Abraham... Isaac... Jacob' - Gen 24:12, Exod 3:6, 4:5, Acts 3:13, 7:32

Word Cross References (selection):
resurrection - anastasis - click here for references
rise - egeiro - click here for references
dead - nekros - click here for references
living - zao - click here for references
Sadducees - Saddoukaios - click here for references

the king of the Hill

Introduction
1. Structural Diagram
2. Surrounding Context
3. Key Cross References
4. Key Questions
5. Thoughts and Meditation

Prop. 27C - Lk 20:27-38 - Key Questions

v27-33 Who were the Sadducees? Pharisees and Sadducees Not oral tradition but Torah only some more background here Saduccees were the religious elites, who were into relativity well before Einstein unleashed it onto our day and age. God seems to be more distant for them. Placed all their religious belief in the Torah, not in the traditions.

What was their understanding of the resurrection? No eternal destiny and good and evil are relative Their understanding of the resurrection was that there was none. Our souls were mortal. Their lives were connected only to the physical reality they lived in.

What's with the marriage question? What was the Sadducee understanding of marriage and having children connected to what Jesus says about the resurrection? Propagation and failure to reproduce The old testament (the Torah references being of significance to the Saduccees) is replete with references to childlessness (This being viewed poorly) Genesis 11:30, 15:2, 16:1, 21:7, 30:1 Deut 24:5. It would seem that the Saduccees viewed reproduction as a sign of being in God's favor. The Saduccees were trying to tangle Jesus by placing the connection of these two doctrines before him. A paraphrase of their question i think migh tbe summed up in: "In your view of life after death, what happens to the woman, who has proven multiple times - seven in all - that she is 'out of favor' with God, when she dies. Will she be in heaven, and if so, which husband will be hers?

Why the number seven? There are over 200 hundred refernces to the number seven in the Pentateuch. I have not found any real information in connection with this passage and the number seven... was it just a favourite number of the Jews? Email me if you have thoughts here... or comment below

v36 What does it mean 'to be like the angels'? The word 'for' in this passage links it to the idea preceding, "and they can no longer die" In other words Jesus was comparing the inability to die - immortality - with the angels. Angels by inference then, are immortal.
How is the term 'children' used here to describe the resurrected, connected to the idea of the resurrection? The idea is contained in a phrase "children of the resurrection". Spiros Zodhiates notes for this passage that, "with a genitive, the son of something is one connected with, partaking of, or exposed to that thing" (The Complete Word Study Dictionary, AMG Publishers, 1992) In other words, the resurrected person is referred to as a 'child', in the sense of a 'product of' the resurection.

v37 'Moses and the bush' - Is the larger story of Moses and the burning bush connected to the idea of resurrection? It is interesting that the 'calling' of Moses is the start of God's immediate plan to bring His people (the 'Chosen' people - ie 'those considered worthy' Luke 20:35) out of Egypt. In a way this is a metaphorical 'rebirth', a resurrection of sorts, a salvation from certain death at the hands of slave-drivers. Whether Jesus quoted this passage to also allude to this metaphor I cannot say.

the king of the Hill

Introduction
1. Structural Diagram
2. Surrounding Context
3. Key Cross References
4. Key Questions
5. Thoughts and Meditation

Proper 27C - Was this study helpful?

Give your opinion I was intellectually stimulated! Good, there was some pieces missing though. Some day you might say something others have not already. Just fluff. You bore me. Nothing helpful, in fact you are dead wrong.

Current results

Prop. 27C - Lk 20:27-38- Thoughts and Meditation

The Battle Tested Argument Winner

To really appreciate the significance of this passage, I think the context of the passage is vital. Jesus is shaking the hornet's nest. Not for the sake of creating a fatalistic turn of events, but because He has come to expose and judge the incumbent rulers of the day.

Jesus had finally arrived at the epicenter of the Jewish world. We have just finished reading how Jesus had driven out the corrupt marketeers from the temple. This story preludes the confrontation that follows in the passage of this week, but also the ultimate confrontation which leads to Jesus execution. A quick summary: significantly the first group to confront Jesus includes representatives of all the factions: Chief priests, teachers of the law, and the elders. Then Jesus hands out his sentence on them all with a damning parable. The pharisees then have their turn to confront Jesus with their specific issue, and then the Sadducees have their turn.

The Pharisees were exposed as hypocrites. They possessed the idolatrous denarius (because it carried an image of Caesar).

The Sadducees come to Jesus with a question which superficially appears to be flippant, one commentator notes...

There are questions that ought not to be asked except by those who are famished for an answer. When some Sadducees ask Jesus about the resurrection, they are not really hungry for an answer. They've gone to Jesus for a little theological Ping-Pong.

I believe that is a simplistic view of the text. This question is at the heart of the Sadducees theology. In coming to Jesus, they test him, as they have every other teacher that comes to the city. "What do you think of the resurrection?" The story of the seven brothers is a well worn hook used to get someone into a hot debate, after all debating is what they held dear. The story is even abbreviated: "The second and the third married her, and in the same way the seven died, leaving no children." The specifics of their hypothetical are known, their is no need to repeat them. This is no idle question, it is THE question they put, when they want a verbal and mental fight. Why? The Sadducees are so sure that their is no argument THAT CAN be put against their theological stance. The Torah in their minds does not contain a scrap of evidence that there is a resurrection, therefore they can be cavalier in their approach to Jesus.

What they do not understand is that they have asked the King of the universe, and King of their very souls, what He thinks about the resurrection. That fact that Jesus is able to repudiate their assumption, and present the ultimate truth, is only the beginning. Jesus also places a judgmental turn of phrase into His answer: "But those who are considered worthy of taking part in that age..." Jesus presents the Sadducees, who until now have not really entertained the idea of an afterlife, with the prospect that there is also an absolute (not relative like the way they were fond of thinking) reckoning of souls.

The Sadducees are defeated. The best arrow in their quiver had been broken, and their was nothing else they could bring up which could save face, or save themselves.

This is a story of God confronting humans in their failure. Maybe it is a picture of what judgment day could be like. The Sadducees stood up before Jesus, and Jesus showed them where they went wrong in irrefutable terms.

In a fallen world where all of us are impossibly able to meet up to the standards required of God, what will our response be to when Jesus shows us in no uncertain terms where we have gone wrong. Will we be like the Sadducees and refuse to break our own will, or will we admit we were wrong and fall on the grace that God offers us (like Zaccheus in last weeks text, and the widow in Luke 21:1-4. It is the essence of faith.

Introduction
1. Structural Diagram
2. Surrounding Context
3. Key Cross References
4. Key Questions
5. Thoughts and Meditation

the king of the Hill

Proper 27C - Was this study helpful?

Give your opinion I was intellectually stimulated! Good, there was some pieces missing though. Some day you might say something others have not already. Just fluff. You bore me. Nothing helpful, in fact you are dead wrong.

Current results

"It's only a Little Lie" said Pinnochio John

After a weekend of high expectattions regarding a 'big story' condemning of Kerry, we wake Monday moring to the media buzz of what? A story about a missing 380 tons of munitions in Iraq, and a story about Kerry getting a ball game score wrong. Nothing about Kerry lieing about the UN at all. What happenend? An abortion. The media decided to kill this story before it was born. By releasing the story about the missing explosives, the media was able to turn the focus to what appears to be a BIG story, and accuse the government of negligence. Problem is, the story is not that big. CQ has a good explanation of why.

Why do I think that Kerry needs to be grilled over this blatant lie? Because of the fact that he did not need to say what he did...

Thanks to some friends in New York, I was invited to come up and meet with the Security Council in the week prior to the vote, and I wanted to do that, because I valued my vote. And I wanted to know what the real readiness and willingness of our partners was to take this seriously.
So I sat with the French and British, Germans, with the entire Security Council, and we spent a couple of hours talking about what they saw as the path to a united front in order to be able to deal with Saddam Hussein.

It is debated that Kerry may have actually had some private discussions with these members, but that is not the lie.

1. The lie is that he was invited to attend a meeting with UNSC
2. The lie is also that he met with the entire UNSC

The WaTimes gives the whole story

IF Kerry had indeed met with SOME of the UNSC members, why not just say that. Instead he unnecessarily lied by making the statements he did. If Kerry can lie in the small matters like he did here, he WILL lie when it comes to BIG matters. It is all a matter of character. Kerry's is flawed.

the king of the Hill

Links selection (from Captain Ed's, and INDC)
Captain Ed
Kerry Lied ... Again from INDC Journal
Honk if you brake for braggarts from sisu
Kerry Lied About UN Meeting from Say Anything
Kerry Lied about Meeting with U.N. Security Counci from Time is a Factor
Is Kerry a Liar or Something Higher? from The Conservative Cat
Why President Bush will win from Daddypundit
Yawn, Kerry's a Liar from Fat Steve's Blatherings
Security Council members deny meeting Kerry
Kerry's Mythical Security Council Meeting
The Monday Kerry Headline - Cover Photo
Security Council Members Deny Meeting Kerry
Back to the drawing board.
The Big Kerry Story
Kerry's Grotesque Lying About Meeting With U.N. Security Council
Factors in This Election That Determine How I Will
YAWN
Kerry on Integrity! Integrity! Integrity!
Yet Another Mr. Mitty Moment For John Kerry
The Story: Kerry's Claims of Meeting UNSC Members Denied
Instamonkey: "Secret Plans", Part Deux
Why the Kerry (UN)scandal Matters
Interesting story from Washington Times
Color me shocked ...
The Kerry Non-Meeting
The latest Kerry UNtruth
John Kerry and the UN Security Council
Pre-Election Let Down
POLITICS: The Big Story: A Fabricated UN Meeting
UN Security Council members deny meeting Kerry
8 Days To Polls
Bombshell Without a Fuse
Kerry Lies, France Swears to It
Kerry Lies About The UN
We Gots The Bomb
Underwhelmed
Kerry Lied, Jawas Died!!!
MUCH ADO...ABOUT NOTHING MUCH
Kerry Lied about Meeting with U.N. Security Counci
The Battle for the News Cycle
Kerry In The Land Of Make Believe
TODAY'S BIG STORY –
Another Christmas in Cambodia story
...pants on fire
Kerry: "I met with all the members of the Security Council"; Security Council: "Who the hell is that guy?"
...ho humm? You call this story 'ho humm'??!
"Pinnochio John", How Do You Define "Integrity, Integrity, Integrity..."?

Kerry will "Name and Shame"

I have been reading a transcript of Kerry's Speech to the "Council on Foreign Relations", back in Dec 2003. In the speech he says...

And in my first 100 days, I will launch a "name and shame" campaign against
individuals, banks and foreign governments that are financing terror in the
world. And those who fail to respond will be shut out of American financial
markets.

I wonder if he still intends to do that, seeing that, terrorist sponsors have included the nations of France, Russia, China were implicated in the OIL FOR WEAPONS scandal. Oh, that's right. Saddam Hussein WAS NOT a terrorist. He was a victim of those terrible sanctions!

"Jacques old boy, you were very naughty! Shame, Shame Shame!

Yeah right. If I have Kerry worked out it'll go more like this... "John Howard, Tony Blair, you were evil when you decided to support Bush in Iraq... Your material support of the evil war is SHAMEFUL!"

the king of the Hill

...ho humm? You call this story 'ho humm'??!

CQ wrote about how the revelation that Kerry lied about meeting with the UN was met by the blogosphere. Captain Ed writes:

Quite a bit of the blogosphere has reacted with a shrug to the Washington
Times article this morning about John
Kerry's UNSC Fantasy Camp. The general reaction thus far is, So what? We all
know that Kerry lies. Another verified instance of this seems to appeal less to
the hardened political junkies than it should.

No kidding! This story is anything but 'ho hum'. Yes the hype was driven higher and higher, and so the expectations were for something monumental. The point to be made is that for the John Kerry who presents himself to the electorate as 'Mr Honesty', has been shown to be anything but. Yes, we know this is not the first instance, he has lied umpteen times to the elctorate. Here however, he is investigated thoroughly by a mainstream newspaper, and called on it. The left and the swingers have been able to dismiss other claims as right wing spin, or questionable propaganda, but here we have a verifiable story by a supposed 'bi-partisan' source.

For Kerry to lie before the country, during the debate, in this fashion, is despicable. He will not be the next president.

the king of the Hill

Link/s: sisu

"Pinnochio John", How do YOU define "integrity, integrity, integrity..."?

Unbelievable! When Powerline said there was going to be big news on Monday, I doubted the veracity of the claim. I figured it could be baiting by the left, of the right-wing blogosphere, to somehow create a media story... but this

Asked whether the international body had any records of Mr. Kerry sitting
down with the whole council, a U.N. spokesman said that "our office does not
have any record of this meeting."

John Kerry has given Bush and the Republicans the Congress, Senate, and the Presidency (and Supreme court conservative judges as a result). The Kerry campaign has been leaning enormously of the truthfulness, and honesty (remember - "integrity, integrity, integrity...") of their candidate over Bush. John just lost every bit of credibility with this lie. It puts in doubt every claim he has made, and every spin he has put on accusations made against him.

We cannot trust this man... especially when he talks about integrity!

the king of the Hill

Some Links: Redstate (author of WTimes article is guest blogger), Captain Ed, Powerline (hat tip), Down the Rabbit Hole, Daddypundit (discussion on character), Stones Cry Out, blogicus, Wizbang, In The Bullpen, The Politicker, BIRD, Patriot Paradox, Mind of Mog, TTLB, Broken Masterpieces, The View From My Right, resurectionsong, Rooftop Report, Shouting Into The Wind, Carnivorous Conservative, 28J, Blogs For Bush, Right On Red , Truth, Lies & Common Sense , Aaron's Rantblog (link to video of Kerry lieing during debate), The American Mind, slant point, Kerry Haters (interesting background info), Matt Margolis (blogs for Bush), tobias, Secure Liberty, The Daily Pundit, Roger Simon, INDC, Texas Conservative, Voices in my Head, timothygoddard, and a lot lot more I'm sure...

Kerry Health Plan a Nightmare for Small Business

I decided to take up John Kerry's request to go to his website and read his health care plane. What I read frightens me. Rather than simplifying the whole process. It adds layers of conditions and bureaucratic wrangling to achieve it's goal. Read this

Adopt Disease Management and Care Coordination Programs to Improve Quality and Lower Costs. Innovative programs targeting patients with chronic conditions have illustrated that both the human and cost consequences of chronic diseases can be alleviated through hands-on medical management. Employers and their insurers must adopt model programs to receive the premium rebate.

The employer is made responsible for their employees health! To participate in the Kerry Health plan, they must ensure that their employees are in a medical management program. What diseases and health problems will be considered to be needing management... obesity, smoking addiction...

In addition to the discounts they get from bulk purchasing, drug manufacturers typically pay PBMs: (1) access rebates for placement of products on PBMs' formularies, (2) financial rebates for garnering a higher market share; (3) administrative fees for assembling data on market share. However, PBMs often do not pass on these savings. John Kerry's plan would require transparency rules for PBMs that do business with the Federal government to clearly show what savings they are receiving from the industry and from bulk purchasing.

So another layer of reporting is added... more cost.

Prohibit individuals from bringing a medical malpractice liability action unless a qualified specialist determines that a reasonable claim exists.

More paperwork... who pays?

Support mandatory sanctions for claims and defenses that are presented for improper purposes or that are not warranted by existing law or by an argument without merit for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law.

More legal challenges to sanctions...

Provide additional incentives for reducing the number of lawsuits that can and should be filed. To that end, Senator Kerry would require states to make available nonbinding mediation in all cases before permitting plaintiffs to proceed to trial on any medical liability claim.

States would need to provide an additional level of bureaucracy... more paperwork... who pays?

I have not finished reading the report, but the hidden costs in this system would undermine any saving it might generate... Small business would suffer, from these costs. Kerry wants the employer to pay for the health care, that what this boils down to.

We can see why John Kerry has brought so few laws into reality... they are poor and inneffective.

Links: The Yin Blog, NCPA, BushBlog-Health Care , the 'detailed' Kerry Plan, CCAGW (great article), Medpundit, HD Blog

the king of the Hill

Prop. 26C - The Miracle of the Chief Tax Collector!

This week I decided to start with a key study for this passage. I am adding to the study as I go. i figured that others might find my work in progress useful. If you have comments that would help in the exegetical process, feel free to make them. I am interested in hereing others thought process as they tackle this text. Also, tell me if I may an obvious error, or missed something!
Thank you.

1. Structural Diagram
2. Surrounding Context
3. Key Cross References
4. Key Questions
5. Thoughts and Meditation

the king of the Hill

UPDATE: Apologies to those who have tried links to the THE BLUE LETTER BIBLE from this study, the link method I implemented was on a temporary basis, I am repairing these, and soon you will be able to link properly. Sorry for the inconvenience!... somebody should have told me! :-)

Proper 26C - Has this study been helpful?

Give your opinion Yes, very helpful. Yes, but I still have some questions. Not as much as I had hoped. Not at all.

Current results

Prop. 26C - Lk 19:1-10 - Key Study

Luke 19:1-10 “Zaccheus the Chief Tax Collector meets Jesus”

1 Jesus entered Jericho
......and was passing through.
2 A man was there
......by the name of Zacchaeus;
............he was a chief tax collector
............and was wealthy.
3 He wanted to see who Jesus was,
............but being a short man
..................he could not,
........................ because of the crowd.
4 So he ran ahead
......and climbed a sycamore-fig tree
..................to see him,
............since Jesus was coming that way.
5 When Jesus reached the spot,
......he looked up
......and said to him,
............"Zacchaeus, come down immediately.
..................I must stay at your house today."
6 So he came down at once
......and welcomed him gladly.
7 All the people
......saw this
......and began to mutter,
............"He has gone
..................to be the guest of a 'sinner.' "
8 But Zacchaeus
......stood up
......and said to the Lord,
............"Look, Lord!
..................Here and now
........................I give half of my possessions
..............................to the poor,
........................and if I have cheated anybody
....................................out of anything,
..............................I will pay back
....................................four times the amount."
9 Jesus said to him,
......"Today salvation
............has come to this house,
..................because this man, too,
........................is a son of Abraham.
10 For the Son of Man
......came to seek
......and to save
............what was lost."

Repetition
today v5 and 9
immediately v5 and 6

Explanations/Reasons
v3 'because of the crowd'
v5 'since Jesus was coming that way'
v9 'because this man, too, is a son of Abraham.'
v10 'For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost'

Names/Titles of God
v8 Lord- designates ownership of a subject
v10 Son of Man - Messianic Title refered to in Dan 7:13

Lists
v10 Seek/Save

the king of the Hill

1. Structural Diagram
2. Surrounding Context
3. Key Cross References
4. Key Questions
5. Thoughts and Meditation

Proper 26C - Has this study been helpful?

Give your opinion Yes, very helpful. Yes, but I still have some questions. Not as much as I had hoped. Not at all.

Current results

Prop. 26C - Lk 19:1-10 - Context

Context:
The preceding passages seem much more tied thematically to the story of Zacchaeus than the following passages. Language and ideas have strong parallels. The idea of a barrier between Jesus and people seeking justification, and mercy are repetitive. Jesus is the proactrive one breaking through the barriers (18:16, 18:40, 19:40, 19:45)

There is a very obvious parallel with the story of the tax collector praying at the temple, children coming to Jesus, and the rich ruler. These stories seem to have been clustered together to illustrate various angles of the People coming into relationship with God. A stark contrast exists between Zacchaeus and the rich ruler: wealth, but response to jesus varies considerably, the rich ruler who is very devout - fails to take the step he must. Zacchaeus the fringe member of the crowd, jumps at the slightest chance to have a relationship with Jesus. Much like the tax collector/pharisee story. The children story seems to play it's part by illustrating the point of view, that God invites us in, and we need to jump at the chance.

Much of this idea is contained in the sandwiched passage 18:24-30. "What is impossible with men is possible with God."

Preceding Passage Notes - Chapter 18

v1-8 Parable - Persistant Widow
Common Words
The word “Lord” (19:8) appears in this passage (v6)

Summary – The Lord is quick to offer justice for those who ask. But Jesus laments in v8 “Will he find faith at His coming”

Similar Themes – Injustice: unjust judge/crowd preventing Zacchaeus from seeing Jesus. Hasty Deliverance: willingness of God to offer justice/willingness of Jesus to offer himself

v9-14 Parable – Pharisee and Tax Collector
Common Words
The word “house” (19:5) appears in this passage (v14)
The word “sinner” (19:7) appears in this passage (v13)
The word “stood” (19:8) appears in this passage twice (v11,13)

Summary – Contrast of two types of people, those who do not see need for mercy, those that are very aware of their need for mercy. Mercy comes to those who ask.

Similar Themes – Tax Collector is mentioned in both, a very obvious parallel. Both are justified. Standing far off (a type of barrier - self imposed, or imposed by temple law?): Zacchaeus climbs a tree, a place that is removed from the center of the throng, but the only real place where he has access to seeing Jesus. The tax collector in the parable has to stand away from the temple, and is fearful (or excluded from?) of approaching.

v15-17 The Little Children and Jesus
Summary – Jesus accepts all groups of people. Jesus calls people to accept the kingdom like a child does.

Similar Themes – Barriers: People prevented children from approaching, the crowd prevented Zacchaeus approaching. Smallness?: Possible linkage of passages through greek word for “short man” (ie Zacchaeus), the word is also used of young age. Maybe an elusion, to the story just told of the children.

v18-30 The Rich Ruler
Common Words
The word “wealthy” (19:2) appears in this passage twice (v23, 25)
The word “poor” (19:8) appears in this passage twice (v22)
The word “save” (19:10) appears in this passage (v26)

Summary – No other gods. Jesus expects full devotion. God will assist in giving the faith required.

Similar Themes – Giving up possessions: Zacchaeus as a response to Jesus acceptance of him, devoted himself fully, in contrast to the rich ruler.

v31-34 Jesus Predicts His Death
Summary – Jesus tells disciples of the impending persecution and death, disciples do not understand.

Similar Themes – none?

v35-43 Miracle – Blind Begger Receives Sight
Common Words
The word “stood” (19:8) appears in this passage (v40)
The word “Lord” (19:8) appears in this passage (v41)
The word “save” (19:10) appears in this passage (v42)

Summary – Beggar shouts to Jesus for mercy. Jesus stops and heals him. Man follows Jesus.

Similar Themes – LORD!: the beggar and Zacchaeus both use the term, which defines themselves as Jesus ‘possession’. Barrier: the crowd tells the beggar to be quiet, Zacchaeus is physically barred from Jesus, both overcome it regardless; the beggar shouts, Zacchaeus climbs a tree and is visible.

Following Passage Notes - Chapter 19:11-48

v11-27 Parable – Ten Minas
Common Words
The title “Lord” (19:8) appears in this passage 4 times (v16, 18, 20, 25)
The word “give” (19:8) appears in this passage 5 times (v13, 15, 23, 24, 26)

Summary – God seeks people who will do his will. Judgment is coming for those who do not.

Similar Themes – Money: wealth is talked about. Zacchaeus is wealthy, servants are given wealth. In both, what they did with the money is key to understanding the passage.

v28-44 Jesus Entry to Jerusalem
Common Words
The word “crowd” (19:3) appears in this passage (v39)
The word “gladly/joyfully” (19:6) appears in this passage (v37)
The title “Lord” (19:8) appears in this passage 4 times (v31, 33, 34, 38)

Summary – Jesus prepares for entry to the Holy city. Followers of Jesus sing the Psalm 118, (at least verses of), Jesus is told to silence the people, but he refuses. Jesus weeps for the city (nation?).

Similar Themes – Barrier: Zacchaeus is barred from Jesus presence, the pharisees try to silence the crowd. Giving: (at a stretch?) Zacchaeus gives money away, colt is given to the Lord’s service.

v45-48 Jesus Drives out the Money Changers at the Temple
Common Words
The word “house” (19:5, 9) appears in this passage (v46)
The word “seek” (19:10) appears in this passage (v47)
The word “what was lost/kill/destroy” (19:10) appears in this passage (v47)

Summary – Jesus goes to the temple, and throws out the money changers. He teaches at the temple, and people ‘hung on his words’.

Similar Themes – Barrier: Zacchaeus is barred from Jesus presence, the temple is occupied by corrupt merchants, extorting money for access to the temple/sacrifice? Complaint: The crowd dislikes Jesus welcoming Zacchaeus, the chief priests etc dislike Jesus teaching at the temple.

the king of the Hill

1. Structural Diagram
2. Surrounding Context
3. Key Cross References
4. Key Questions
5. Thoughts and Meditation

Proper 26C - Has this study been helpful?

Give your opinion Yes, very helpful. Yes, but I still have some questions. Not as much as I had hoped. Not at all.

Current results

Prop. 26C - Lk 19:1-10 - Cross Ref's

Parallel Passages:
none

Idea Cross References
v5
Jesus 'necessity' in Luke- "I must stay at your house today"
Luke 2:49, 4:43, 9:22, 13:33

v7
Specific complaint by the crowd regarding Jesus willingness to eat with and be a guest of 'sinners'
Matt 9:11, Lk 5:30, 7:34, 39, 15:2, Gal 2:15

v8
Lord reference in Luke
Luke 7:13,19, 10:1, 13:15, 17:5, 22:61, 24:34

Cheating
Luke 3:12,13

Paying Back
Ezekiel 33:14-15, Exod 22:1, Lev 5:16, 6:4-5, Num 5:7, 2 Sam 12:6!!!, Prov 6:31

v9
'Today' - the present reality of salvation
Luke 4:21, 43, 2:11, 5:26, 23:43, Deut 26:16-19

v10
Son of Man - Messianic Title
Dan 7:13, Acts 7:56, Rev 1:13
Seek and to Save
Ezekiel 34:12, 16, Luke 15:4, 6, 9, 24, 32, 19:10 9:56

Word Cross References (selection)
wealthy - plousios - Click here for references
Luke portrays time and again the rich, as people whose wealth is their god.

seek - zeteo - Click here for references
Luke teaches that people must diligently seek Jesus Luke 12:29-31 . That those who seek their own life will lose it, and those who seek to lose their life will save it Luke 17:33.

save - sozo - Click here for references
Luke teaches that faith is key to salvation. Salvation will come to a limited number of people. Many will seek, but few will find.

the king of the Hill

1. Structural Diagram
2. Surrounding Context
3. Key Cross References
4. Key Questions
5. Thoughts and Meditation

Proper 26C - Has this study been helpful?

Give your opinion Yes, very helpful. Yes, but I still have some questions. Not as much as I had hoped. Not at all.

Current results

Prop. 26C - Lk 19:1-10 - Key Questions

v5 Jesus insisted on staying with Zacchaeus. Zacchaeus responded instantly. Who accepted who? Had Zacchaeus already made inroads of faith, or was he simply a lost soul waiting for Jesus intrusion?
The point that Luke is making here in this story, is that Jesus seeks the lost. Jesus is the one who initiates the conversation. Jesus is the one who invites HIMSELF to Zacchaeus' home. Yet Zacchaeus ran ahead, he planned on meeting Jesus. Was his climbing the tree simply to gain a better viewpoint, or to become more visible? There seems to be resolution to this question, in the cross reference Lk 12:31, and 13:24. Jesus calls people to seek Him. His promise comes in Lk 18:7, to bring about justice for those who ask. It seems from the context of these two chapters that God is looking for His people. That is, those who are seeking Him.

v8 Zacchaeus uses the title 'Lord' for Jesus, what significance does this have to understanding this story?
The title Lord, is not used lightly. Lord implies being subject to, in ownership of. For Zacchaeus to use this title of Jesus, shows that he was placing himself under Jesus authority, unlike Zacchaeus' counterpart, the rich ruler, who was subject to his god; wealth. The rich ruler did not want to let go, and seek Jesus, he wanted THE KINGDOM as a possesion.

v10 'Seek and save', how does this verse connect with the prior passages?
Jesus gave an overview of the state of the world at his coming, in Lk 17:20-35. It would be like the days of Noah, and Sodom. A vast state of 'lostness'. Jesus offers his promise of ready justice Lk 18:7, and is seeking people who CAN be saved.

the king of the Hill

1. Structural Diagram
2. Surrounding Context
3. Key Cross References
4. Key Questions
5. Thoughts and Meditation

Proper 26C - Has this study been helpful?

Give your opinion Yes, very helpful. Yes, but I still have some questions. Not as much as I had hoped. Not at all.

Current results

Prop. 26C - Lk 19:1-10 - Thoughts and Meditation

Zacchaeus was a man 'ready for picking'. He RAN to a vantage point. He exposed himself to the world by CLIMBING a big tree. He was seeking Jesus. The crowd wouldn't give him the access to Jesus he needed. So he bargained that Jesus would come by a certain spot, and that he would stand a chance.

Jesus could very well, have walked on by. Jesus could very well have not seen Zacchaeus in that tree. Except for one crucial fact. Jesus was SEEKING. Jesus purpose was to come and seek out those who would be saved. Jesus purposefully approached that tree, KNOWING who Zacchaeus was, KNOWING his heart, and KNOWING that this was Zacchaeus day to get 'picked'. Jesus approached, and offered relationship, but not just any kind of relationship. This was one where He was the one offering to stay at Zacchaeus home, He was the master returning to his servant. Zacchaeus acknowledges this relationship, by calling Jesus - Lord! Very significant.

The crowd didn't buy it. Zacchaeus was a sinner, the chief of tax collectors in that area. No-one was going to believe that this man was coming clean. No-one. Yet Zacchaeus offers up half of his possessions to the poor, and reimbursement fourfold to anyone he had cheated. The crowd's reaction is not recorded, but disbelief would probably have been plentiful. This passage should really be called "the miracle of the tax collector". Jesus had just finished telling His disciples that it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God 18:24-25. Here it happened! According to Jesus, this was an outright miracle!

Salvation is not about getting close to God. The rich ruler spoke face-to-face with Him. It didn't do him any good. The pharisee in the temple had total access, it didn't do him any good either. No, salvation comes about but giving up on oneself. Zacchaeus did, when he gave up his identity as 'chief tax collector, rich guy'. Zacchaeus was never again the same person he was when he woke up that morning when Jesus came to Jerusalem.

Miracles do happen. They can happen to you and I. Question is, will the miracle be a mere simple physical healing from an ailment that is annoying? Or will it be the miracle of New Life? May it be the later...

the king (?) of the Hill... who is servant of the Master

1. Structural Diagram
2. Surrounding Context
3. Key Cross References
4. Key Questions
5. Thoughts and Meditation

Proper 26C - Has this study been helpful?

Give your opinion Yes, very helpful. Yes, but I still have some questions. Not as much as I had hoped. Not at all.

Current results

Sinclair Broadcast Group and Stolen Honor - stolen minutes!?

The Sinclair Broadcast Group has felt the shareholder pressure and backed down on airing the whole of the POW film "Stolen Honor". Purportedly, the film shows veterans POW's of the Vietnam war, who were tortured as a direct result of Kerry's testimony that american soldiers had commited war crimes.

"The experience of preparing to air this news special has been trying for many of those involved," Sinclair chief executive David D. Smith said in a statement. "The company and many of its executives have endured personal attacks of the vilest nature, as well as calls on our advertisers and our viewers to boycott our stations and on our shareholders to sell their stock."

Media censorship, and burying stories has been rife, throughout political campaigning history, but hardly as blatant and obvious as at this time. When first publicised the company announced that the format was not decided. The version being put to air on Friday night will be a one hour special, on the subject of media censorhip - called 'filtering'...

The news special will focus in part on the use of documentaries and other media to influence voting, which emerged during the 2004 political campaigns, as well as on the content of certain of these documentaries. The program will also examine the role of the media in filtering the information contained in these documentaries, allegations of media bias by media organizations that ignore or filter legitimate news and the attempts by candidates and other organizations to influence media coverage.

They will only show parts of the film "Stolen Honor"...

While the news special will discuss the allegations surrounding Senator John Kerry's anti-Vietnam War activities in the early 1970s raised by a number of former POWs in "Stolen Honor," it will do so in the context of the broader discussion outlined above. The program will be hosted by Jeff Barnd,...

That sounds like a huge backdown to me...

You can view the whole film (or excerpts) at Stolenhonor.com, Transcript here, and you could do what I did, email the company at this address - comments@sbgi.net to tell them what you think...

UPDATE:
Well maybe it looked like a backdown on the surface. Here is an interesting discussion on Sinclair's positioning and the media headlines it is generating. It sounded like a fair argument. The basic assertion of the article is that Sinclair is an overtly right leaning media group, that is using the public controversy of the film "Stolen Honor", and the apparent backdown, and the firing on one it's 'liberal' employees, to present itself publicly as a right leaning media outlet.

For how long has the political right wanted a housecleaning in the nation's newsrooms, which--according to political legend--are over-stocked with liberals? Since at least 1969. Sinclair doesn't gripe about it; Sinclair acts. It has a strategy of killing independent newsrooms, reducing their number as it buys more and more media properties. Claiming economies of scale, it gains two stations in the same market, and combines their news operations into one.

The writer then speculates on the direction that the company is headed is for monopoly media control in the newsrooms and newspapers of swing states... sounds like a familar scenario, only this time it is not with the left, but the right.

The writer ends with the question...

You tell me: on what basis is anyone in Washington going to object?

None, and that's the real point to be made from all the speculation. It is about time that some balance in media news coverage was regained. At least the Sinclair group would not be pretending to be mainstream and unbiased...

Terry Heaton comments on the article...

And that means the decline and fall of the mainstream press in America is inevitable. It is so, because the whole thing is sleight-of-hand anyway, and the people aren't as stupid as we once thought. If you cannot see this happening, you are in denial. The very people complaining about Sinclair now are those who've participated in the same thing on many different levels and in many different ways. The system is corrupt, not Sinclair. Hell, they're just players, and anybody who thinks otherwise simply hasn't read history.

The press doesn't have the right to judge journalism anymore. That's been transferred to the citizens, who are now armed with their own printing presses and television towers and have taken back "the public trust." The idea that the institution of the press is self-policing has been exposed as a self-serving illusion. Those who ask if it's too late for the media to clean up its act are missing the point. The professional media "act" has never been clean. From the famous William Randolph Hearst "Puff Graham" note that launched the career of Billy Graham to Cronkhite's proclamation of "That's the way it is," the press has always been agenda driven. That it has become glaringly obvious now should come as a surprise to no one.

The public will now pick and choose the reporting they want to hear and believe. Take blogging as an example of the trend that is appearing. People want to read pieces that are opinioned, and to take information and perspectives from multiple sources. The Sinclair group if they do become the right wing monopoly that Jay Rosen at Presslink puts forward will be only one of many sources people will listen to. Freedom of Speech may be liberated after all!

Note: the commentary on this article is first rate.

LINKS: PressThink, Donatacom, ProfessorBainbridge.com (excellant commentary), BUFFALOg, Obsidian Wings, blog.rpeeck.com

the king of the Hill